These are great questions and many of them that we asked at the Flex Summit.
You could also pick off a bug, fix it, get reviewed, and get a committer to submit. The patch would be able to still be voted down if the patch wasn't liked by another committer and discussions would follow. For a new component you could try to just add it in, but you'll go through this same process of review and voting. I've said it before a few times that there are plenty of people that have their own amazing "login window component", doesn't meant that it will go in if other committers disagree. That doesn't mean that the component isn't the most amazing thing since sliced bread, just means that maybe it doesn't belong in the framework that everyone uses. That is what 3rd party add-ons are perfect for. We as a group should be focusing on what we can do to make these 3rd party add-ons easier to include, not how to get everything and the kitchen sink into the framework. On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Michael Schmalle <m...@teotigraphix.com>wrote: > Quoting Jonathan Campos <jonbcam...@gmail.com>: > > That is an exact question that I asked at the Flex Summit specifically for >> the group. >> >> Roy Fielding had a great analogy/answer. >> The main idea is that this is that we are throwing a party, not running a >> business with free labor. So people need to be energized about what they >> are doing, they aren't there to be given tasks. >> >> As such there is no roadmap. You may come up with a great idea and start >> working on it, then when other people see what you are doing they may >> join. >> Over time your idea snowballs and gets added in, but this doesn't mean >> that >> there is a formal roadmap for people to sit at and program away against. >> >> However this is where Spoon comes in. We do have plans and roadmaps of >> features we want to add. Some take time and require people. If you are >> interested in our roadmap (our party) you and anyone else is free to join. >> >> Make sense? >> >> J >> > > This actually does make sense for features. > > So can I ask this, am I to then just look at the bug base, say hey that > looks like something I can fix, fix it then commit it? > > Don't jump on this to quick, I am saying there needs to be a unit test? I > remember Alex saying that Apache is usually commit & review but that they > were trying for a review and commit in the beginning. Has anybody else > heard this? > > Does there have to be votes on say a new component that would be added to > the SDK? I'm really just trying to understand the algorithm of > develop/test/fix/commit for an initial committer. > > Thanks, > Mike > > > > > > -- Jonathan Campos Dallas Flex User Group Manager http://www.d-flex.org/ blog: http://www.unitedmindset.com/jonbcampos twitter: http://www.twitter.com/jonbcampos
